Wednesday, March 7, 2007

The Long March Home - A National Movement

Greetings to all:

This blog has one and only one purpose. It is my humble attempt to help U.S. military personal around the world start their long march home.

This idea is an outgrowth of my analysis of U.S. military invovlement in the Persian Gulf since 1980 (see image below). It is often stated that our nation has been exchanging U.S. soldiers for oil since at least that time. I began to wonder whether or not this strategy was worth it over the long haul. The analysis below indicates that it clearly is not - but what is to be done about it?

What is to be done is this: persuade my fellow Americans that the total quantity of Persian Gulf oil our nation consumes is a small fraction of the total annual U.S. petroleum consumption (averaging only 11% from 1980-2006). If our nation were to develop a comprehensive national policy to conserve energy, we need only reduce our total consumption by 15% to completely eliminate our need for Persian Gulf oil.

Every one of us can think of ways to reduce our personal energy consumption by 15%. It's easy and has virtually no impact on the quality of your life.

If every American took 5 actions to reduce energy consumption, these would be 5 steps on the long march home for our troops. Collectively, the sum of these 5 steps would make the long march home possible. What more sincere action can each person take to support our troops than to help them make the long march home? This is a patriotic imperative for every American.

LET THE LONG MARCH HOME BEGIN TODAY, AND LET IT BEGIN WITH YOU!

To learn more, read my analysis below. You may agree or disagree with my conclusion, but the data below are correct (to the best of my knowledge) .



The diagram shows the relationship of U.S. imports of Persian Gulf oil (in barrels or BBL PG Oil) to U.S. military casualties in the Persian Gulf theater-of-operations over the period 1980-2006. At the top, oil imports dip to their lowest level in 1985, the height of the Iran-Iraq war. In 1987, escalation of attacks on Persian Gulf shipping led President Ronald Reagan to authorize reflagging of Kuwaiti petroleum carriers to enable the U.S. Navy to provide escort services, re-establishing continuous flow of oil from the Persian Gulf region and defending the international principle of Freedom of the Seas. By 1989, Persian Gulf oil exports to the U.S. stabilized (coincident with the end of the Iran-Iraq conflict) and remained stable to the present. The horizontal line represents the average quantity of Persian Gulf oil imported annually to the U.S. from 1980-2005 (approx. 600 MBBL per year, or 11% of total U.S. petroleum consumption). The lower portion of the plot displays U.S. military casualties in the Persian Gulf theater-of-operations from 1980-2006. The data are: 1980 failed U.S. embassy hostage rescue in Iran (8 killed-in-action, KIA), 1987 “Tanker War” in the Persian Gulf (39 KIA, 21 wounded-in-action, WIA), 1991 Desert Shield/Desert Storm (383 KIA, 467 WIA), 1996 Khobar Towers attack in Saudi Arabia (19 KIA, 515 WIA), 2003-2006 Operation Iraqi Freedom (2894 KIA-WIA in 2003; 8848 KIA-WIA in 2004; 6792 KIA-WIA in 2005; 7203 KIA-WIA in 2006). The growth of U.S. military casualties in the Persian Gulf theater is exponential. Extrapolating yields the result that U.S. military casualties equal BBL of Persian Gulf oil in A.D. 2049 – at which time the human cost of 1 BBL of Persian Gulf oil will be 1 U.S. soldier (and the human cost of a tank of gasoline will be, literally, an arm and a leg!). Of course, this is an absurd result but leads to the question “At what point on this trajectory does the U.S. abandon its claim to oil resources of the Persian Gulf region?” Note that the current national debate to “Stay The Course” or “Cut And Run” is equally absurd. An appropriate strategy would be a comprehensive U.S. policy reducing our national energy consumption by 15%. This would eliminate U.S. need for or interest in Persian Gulf oil, and U.S. military personnel could commence the long march home.

LET THE LONG MARCH HOME BEGIN TODAY, AND LET IT BEGIN WITH YOU!

For the record, here are my '5 Steps on the Long March Home':

1) I will walk to work at least 1 day each week. For me, this is a 7 mile round trip. Not only will this cut my weekly driving ca. 20%, it's good exercise. There will also be some long-term savings in terms of wear and tear on my automobile (tires, engine, oil changes, etc.).

2) I will install additional fluorescent lightbulbs in my home. This could reduce my energy use for lighting by up to 30%.

3) I will lower my thermostat 3 degrees in winter (to save heating energy) and raise my thermostat 3 degrees in summer (to save AC energy). I don't know how much energy this saves, but according to the Energy Information Administration, it should save 15% on my monthly utility bill which I assume means I used 15% less energy.

4) I will persuade my kids to turn off lights when they leave rooms. My house has 9 rooms altogether. This could save 15-20% overall.

5) I will persuade others to copy my actions above. This will be 15% for every person I can convince to do the same.

What 5 steps on the Long March Home will you take? Post your ideas and your 5 steps using the 'COMMENTS' link below.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not only is this a patriotic effort, conserving oil will help America reduce its carbon emissions, improving the global environment and the perception of the U.S. around the world!

Anonymous said...

This is a wonderful grassroots approach to affect change. I have sent this to many of my friends and family with the challenge to pass this on. I have added a suggestion to declare to your recieptients how YOU will change your own behavior.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your comments. We must believe that 300 million of us can make it possible for our 160,000 troops to come home 5 steps at a time.

S

Anonymous said...

I have thought a lot about all the money we spend in IRAQ and all the good that money could do here at home and in other places. It seems to me that our government does not live in the same reality zone as we do. My husband and I are doing Steps 2, 3, and 4 now. We feel strongly about conservation and energy efficiency and we are trying to be an example for our family and friends. I support your efforts and will send this web page on to others.

sarahL said...

Dr. Boss, Your website has inspired me to increase the number of days that I walk to school. Each week I will try to walk to school two out of four days and then increase it from there. I will also pass this along to friends and encourage them to find ways to make a difference. Thank you for all that you do!

Skinny Mini said...

I really like your approach, and I commend your effort. I have adopted a lot of the practices you have on your top-5 list. But, I will add one more two it.

I have no solid research on this, but, I've heard it's more energy efficient to feed the world on vegetables than it is to feed them meat. So, for the past year, my husband and I have committed ourselves to being vegetarian. The benefits of it, that we've seen so far, are outstanding and far better than we could have imagined. We also grow all of our own organic vegetables and herbs in the summer and what we have left over, we freeze for the winter.

I highly recommend a vegetarian diet. And, if you can't go completely vegan, at least start incorporating at least one "non-meat" meal each day.

Matt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Matt said...

Not that there is anything wrong with what you're doing, but it is misleading. The writing above speaks of oil vs casualties, which really has nothing to do with 4 of your 5 goals. The walking to work thing checks out fine. The other goals deal with electricity which is not generated using oil. In fact only 2% of our nation’s electricity is generated using oil. Perhaps you were not trying to make this correlation, but that is how it appears. Cutting down on electricity will not conserve oil. It you are trying to conserve for other purposes then it might be a good idea to clarify instead of mislead.